No crowds?

[GordonS]

1 hour ago, Black Dug said:

On 20/11/2020 at 17:06, parsforlife said:

It seems being in level 1 only makes it possible,  it doesn’t mean you automatically can have fans.  Clubs need to go through the process with SFA, which given by Highland clubs doesn’t seem to be particularly quick.

If pubs are allowed to open in level 2 but no spectators allowed until level 1 then we'll be in the crazy situation where you will be able to watch a game inside in a social club but not outside at the park next door... Mental.

Like they've been saying all along, it's not a case of arranging activities on a line from highest risk to lowest risk, then drawing a line. It's a case of assessing the risk from each activity and then putting into the basket as much as you can manage, choosing them on the basis of all sorts socio-economic factors. Pubs are massively more important to social lives, tackling isolation, the economy and employment than spectator sports, so obviously they're prioritised.

[HibeeJibee]

On 13/11/2020 at 13:36, HibeeJibee said:

Interestingly it's not all-ticket (although it is free). Fans enter through the turnstiles, receive a temperature check, and leave their tracing details. Hand sanitiser will be available and spots a suitable distance apart will be marked on the terracing. Presumably indicates the sort of measures which will be needed whenever other parts of the country can follow suit.

Another example - from Rothes:

* tickets available until 60mins before ko
* entry via gate - opens 40mins before ko
* temperature check on entry
* ticket given up on entry - contact details to be written on ticket - no entry after ko
* masks + distancing

[Dev]

18 hours ago, GordonS said:

Like they've been saying all along, it's not a case of arranging activities on a line from highest risk to lowest risk, then drawing a line. It's a case of assessing the risk from each activity and then putting into the basket as much as you can manage, choosing them on the basis of all sorts socio-economic factors. Pubs are massively more important to social lives, tackling isolation, the economy and employment than spectator sports, so obviously they're prioritised.

Circumstances and information have changed during the pandemic but it has been identified that semi-pro and amateur football is low risk after all so why keep low numbers of supporters away from semi-pro games or ban amateur games? Things didn't work out as anticipated so  all that was needed, in response, was an adjustment to the thinking. 

The SG and its' equivalents are responsible also for the health and mental health of its' people by statute but they're way behind with the idea that semi-pro and amateur football helps with that. Other outdoor activities also help.

[HibeeJibee]

Down south (where are only 3 tiers) new outdoor sport crowd limits of 4,000 in tier 1 and 2,000 in tier 2 will come into force from start of December.

No doubt tied to capped % of capacities.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/55010011

[AlanCamelonfan]

21 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said:

Down south (where are only 3 tiers) new outdoor sport crowd limits of 4,000 in tier 1 and 2,000 in tier 2 will come into force from start of December.

No doubt tied to capped % of capacities.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/55010011

Heres hoping nicola will do the same 

[HibeeJibee]

2 hours ago, HibeeJibee said:

Down south (where are only 3 tiers) new outdoor sport crowd limits of 4,000 in tier 1 and 2,000 in tier 2 will come into force from start of December.

No doubt tied to capped % of capacities.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/55010011

Capacity capped at 50% - in either tier - which is surprisingly high. Even half or a quarter of that here could suit most clubs in lower tier areas, from Premiership to non-league, who wished to readmit fans but whose crowds would potentially be above 300. Previous figures in English non-league were (IIRC) limits of 600, 300 or 150 at 30% or 15% of capacity.

Presumably authorities now more comfortable with distanced outdoor events.

Northern Ireland seems to have been 500 or 600 with 1,000 at larger venues. Eire allowed 100, 200 or 500 depending on local tier. UEFA's limit is 30% of capacity if local regulations allow.

Edited November 23, 2020 by HibeeJibee

[Dev]

On 22/11/2020 at 16:19, GordonS said:

Like they've been saying all along, it's not a case of arranging activities on a line from highest risk to lowest risk, then drawing a line. It's a case of assessing the risk from each activity and then putting into the basket as much as you can manage, choosing them on the basis of all sorts socio-economic factors. Pubs are massively more important to social lives, tackling isolation, the economy and employment than spectator sports, so obviously they're prioritised.

Sadly it's socialising indoors (including schools and colleges etc) which has been at the heart of the problem. Support has been there for pubs etc for this reason when they were closed down/severely restricted. However, it has been forbidden in Scotland ( and Wales etc) to allow outdoor socialising which is much less risky - not just comparatively low levels of football.

Unfortunately the SP has not grasped these simple facts.  Worse, they still don't get it even though the statistics are there from official neutral reputable sources. Maybe they think that football supporters at semi-pro/amateur level will automatically vote for them or will not question the potentially lasting damage done by their steadfast/cannot admit they're wrong approach. 

[Dev]

Hearing that even in Wales the return of football is getting closer (below Tier 1) with the Tier 2 divisions be starting up soon and discussions advanced about the rest/amateur levels. There also seems to be progress about the return of fans but nothing official yet.

[lithgierose]

On 23/11/2020 at 15:54, AlanCamelonfan said:

Heres hoping nicola will do the same 

If they do. Nicola will. Might be a week or two later. But she will. Is that not her style?

[Andy groundhopper]

Think  the governments says 'All football fans are the same' Sadly even in lockdown and restrictions, thousands of Leeds and Liverpool fans turned up to celebrate - at non league level fans don't adhere to the guidance, you'd hope they do the right things in the clubhouses AND socially distance on the terraces, give us a chance. Hopefully  crowds can return, and the Amateurs can start playing again.

[vikingTON]

9 minutes ago, Andy groundhopper said:

Think  the governments says 'All football fans are the same' Sadly even in lockdown and restrictions, thousands of Leeds and Liverpool fans turned up to celebrate - at non league level fans don't adhere to the guidance, you'd hope they do the right things in the clubhouses AND socially distance on the terraces, give us a chance. Hopefully  crowds can return, and the Amateurs can start playing again.

Given that there's a vaccination program quite clearly on the cards now, the onus should be on football clubs to shut down their season so that more games can be played with significant crowds rather than try to guilt-trip the government when a second wave is still in progress. Playing games in the middle of winter with no fans and very little revenue is irrational. Wrap things up until the end of February and play midweeks into June instead.

Edited November 28, 2020 by vikingTON

[Burnieman]

Given that there's a vaccination program quite clearly on the cards now, the onus should be on football clubs to shut down their season so that more games can be played with significant crowds rather than try to guilt-trip the government when a second wave is still in progress. Playing games in the middle of winter with no fans and very little revenue is irrational. Wrap things up until the end of February and play midweeks into June instead.

I think there is merit in having a break and seeing what develops, extending the season if neccesary into early June, and a few more midweeks. As it is, we're playing Boxing Day....

[Jerry Macguire]

41 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

1 hour ago, virginton said:

Given that there's a vaccination program quite clearly on the cards now, the onus should be on football clubs to shut down their season so that more games can be played with significant crowds rather than try to guilt-trip the government when a second wave is still in progress. Playing games in the middle of winter with no fans and very little revenue is irrational. Wrap things up until the end of February and play midweeks into June instead.

I think there is merit in having a break and seeing what develops, extending the season if neccesary into early June, and a few more midweeks. As it is, we're playing Boxing Day....

You either want to be professional or you don’t. How can you extend the season and accommodate play offs between tier 5 and SPFL? Why would you want to chuck it now that the end is in sight and a vaccine is on the horizon? I’m also struggling to understand what any vaccination program has to do with football continuing. Why is the onus on football clubs to stop? Sorry for all the questions but I’m truly baffled.

[sdr71]

7 minutes ago, Jerry Macguire said:

You either want to be professional or you don’t. How can you extend the season and accommodate play offs between tier 5 and SPFL? Why would you want to chuck it now that the end is in sight and a vaccine is on the horizon? I’m also struggling to understand what any vaccination program has to do with football continuing. Why is the onus on football clubs to stop? Sorry for all the questions but I’m truly baffled.

EoS teams don't compete in the tier 5/SPFL playoff, so when they finish their season doesn't have to be restricted by the date of that playoff.

[Burnieman]

 

 

 

 

You either want to be professional or you don’t. How can you extend the season and accommodate play offs between tier 5 and SPFL? Why would you want to chuck it now that the end is in sight and a vaccine is on the horizon? I’m also struggling to understand what any vaccination program has to do with football continuing. Why is the onus on football clubs to stop? Sorry for all the questions but I’m truly baffled.

 

SPFL play offs has no bearing on EoS. Clubs have now been playing for 8 or so weeks without fans and therefore no gate income, some clubs still have no access to changing facilities, nobody is allowed to shower or enter dressing rooms at half time. Maybe some clubs are concerned that their fans still aren't allowed entry whilst the season continues. I'm baffled as to why you're baffled that some people think that a break might be a wise move. The vaccine will not be generally available this season and is probably irrelevant to my opinion.

 

 

 

[FairWeatherFan]

11 minutes ago, sdr71 said:

EoS teams don't compete in the tier 5/SPFL playoff, so when they finish their season doesn't have to be restricted by the date of that playoff.

But is tied into the LL Play-off. So there needs to be an agreement with the LL, WoSFL, and SoSFL if they want to compete in it.

[vikingTON]

26 minutes ago, Jerry Macguire said:

You either want to be professional or you don’t. 

What does a 'professional' business model for a football club rely on? Right now, it is dependent on guilt-tripping fans into paying money for streams of an inferior product, which isn't actually working.

Quote

Why would you want to chuck it now that the end is in sight and a vaccine is on the horizon?

Nobody is suggesting 'chucking it' but rather postponing the remainder of the season until that 'end in sight' is actually more or less here. Why would any rational live entertainment business choose to operate for three months in the middle of winter without customers when it can reschedule events and expect them to flock back? 

Quote

I’m also struggling to understand what any vaccination program has to do with football continuing. Why is the onus on football clubs to stop? 

The onus is on football clubs to stop because - as they never cease to claim when it's government grant time - they're the heart and soul of their community. Except when they're choosing to play games behind closed doors rather than hold off a few months when crowds may return because that's just too much bother. And the fact that the business model of these clubs is currently getting trashed as well.

Edited November 28, 2020 by vikingTON

[Auld Heid]

The onus is on football clubs to stop because - as they never cease to claim when it's government grant time - they're the heart and soul of their community. Except when they're choosing to play games behind closed doors rather than hold off a few months when crowds may return because that's just too much bother. And the fact that the business model of these clubs is currently getting trashed as well.

The real problem is decisions aren't thought through.

Decision aren't applied universally throughout the divisions impacted.

We saw last season how Scottish football rushed head first into ending the season in various ways.

Whereas others waited before committing and in the most ending the season on the park

[Jerry Macguire]

44 minutes ago, sdr71 said:

EoS teams don't compete in the tier 5/SPFL playoff, so when they finish their season doesn't have to be restricted by the date of that playoff.

So you don’t want to be part of the pyramid then?

[Passthebaw]

2 hours ago, virginton said:

Given that there's a vaccination program quite clearly on the cards now, the onus should be on football clubs to shut down their season so that more games can be played with significant crowds rather than try to guilt-trip the government when a second wave is still in progress. Playing games in the middle of winter with no fans and very little revenue is irrational. Wrap things up until the end of February and play midweeks into June instead.

"Onus should be on the football clubs" and "try to guilt trip the Government" suggests the clubs have accepted no responsibility here. The football clubs involved have shown remarkable resilience against a tidal wave of ignorance & illogical decisioning by this Government. These glorified councillors have no interest in football and the mental strength it offers so many.